GOP Primary Megathread!

[derspiess]

Opposite for me.  Most people I know IRL (including my family, which is uniformly conservative GOP) don't seem to go for that.

Do they watch Fox News?

My parents do sometimes.  I think they rotate between news sources.  Why?

[grumbler]

What are you talking about?  And are we realy that anonymous here?  We know who most of us are and where we live and have been friends of a kind for nearly a decade.

What am I talking about?  You post under "Valmy."  I post under "grumbler."  Neither of us are posting under real names.  Why?  Because it is fun to be able to take positions without consequences, to bait other posters, to engage in a verbal free-for-all without worrying about what the boss, significant other, or family would think.

Sure, we are friends, many of us.  But even so, we behave differently when we are online than when we are face-to-face.  There is a lot more heat in the debates I have here with, say, Yi, or CdM, than when we are sitting across from one another.  That's the nature of the internet, and discussion boards in particular.  And not just here; one of my best friends and I had to agree never to mention what we say in the Michigan and Ohio boards when we talk on the phone or face to face.

[Eddie Teach]

My parents do sometimes.  I think they rotate between news sources. 

Not the same thing.

Why?

Because a lot of the personalities on that station seem to think they're on Crusade.

[grumbler]

In all seriousness, I think that while partisanship is as old as the hills there's a relatively new beast running around which involves an inability to compromise. I run into far more people today than I used to who seem to think "if this person/NGO/what-have-you does not agree with me on every single political issue, I cannot support them". The inability to look at something pragmatically has greatly worsened partisan rhetoric and voting patterns, IMO.

I agree with this, but don't think the "culture war" is to blame.  I think his has to do with a crisis mentality.  What we are seeing now is a pale comparison of the FDR era but, I think, has many of the same features:  many people just don't that there is room for error, and so not-quite-right = wrong for them.

[MadImmortalMan]

one of my best friends and I had to agree never to mention what we say in the Michigan and Ohio boards when we talk on the phone or face to face.

Probably because you say things so wrist-cuttingly horrific that he would be compelled to murder you for the good of humanity if they actually entered his ears in the physical world. 

[grumbler]

Probably because you say things so wrist-cuttingly horrific that he would be compelled to murder you for the good of humanity if they actually entered his ears in the physical world. 

Yeah; stuff like "Terrel Pryor was an Academic All-American at OSU and scored a 6 on his Wonderlic!" 

[Razgovory]

I think the major problem is that rhetoric has become so connected to actual government.  In the past, politicians would rant and rave for the constituents, but once they got into Washington they got into legislative mode and worked to get shit done.  In the last three decades the filibuster rate has increased dramatically.  Politicians have to do the partisan song and dance routine constantly because they are always on TV.  The problem is not as some people suggest that Washington is out of touch, the problem is that Washington is in touch too much.

[derspiess]

I think the major problem is that rhetoric has become so connected to actual government.  In the past, politicians would rant and rave for the constituents, but once they got into Washington they got into legislative mode and worked to get shit done.  In the last three decades the filibuster rate has increased dramatically.  Politicians have to do the partisan song and dance routine constantly because they are always on TV.  The problem is not as some people suggest that Washington is out of touch, the problem is that Washington is in touch too much.

I think some of that stems from the fact that the GOP can actually contend for control of congress, rather than just being the perennial losers.  With control changing hands periodically nowadays, there's bound to be more resentment, revenge, etc.  Hopefully both sides can learn to handle that more gracefully.  Or we'll just have to learn to live with it.

I wonder if term limits would help (or hurt?) the problem.

[garbon]

As I really can't resist spamming about Hil's (inadvertent?) PR coup (/why couldn't this come about in 2008?!!!).

[Fate]

Her PR coup?

[garbon]

Her PR coup?

Sure. All my pro-Obama friends saw that and swooned. /on the social media front, she's had lots of positive chatter from her recent photos. More than any recent Sec State that I can think of.

[Razgovory]

I think the major problem is that rhetoric has become so connected to actual government.  In the past, politicians would rant and rave for the constituents, but once they got into Washington they got into legislative mode and worked to get shit done.  In the last three decades the filibuster rate has increased dramatically.  Politicians have to do the partisan song and dance routine constantly because they are always on TV.  The problem is not as some people suggest that Washington is out of touch, the problem is that Washington is in touch too much.

I think some of that stems from the fact that the GOP can actually contend for control of congress, rather than just being the perennial losers.  With control changing hands periodically nowadays, there's bound to be more resentment, revenge, etc.  Hopefully both sides can learn to handle that more gracefully.  Or we'll just have to learn to live with it.

I wonder if term limits would help (or hurt?) the problem.

A great deal of the resentment and revenge comes from the GOP, though.  I think the problem is 24 news networks and politicians trying to appease a fickle public with only a shallow knowledge of public policy.

[Sheilbh]

I think some of that stems from the fact that the GOP can actually contend for control of congress, rather than just being the perennial losers.  With control changing hands periodically nowadays, there's bound to be more resentment, revenge, etc.  Hopefully both sides can learn to handle that more gracefully.  Or we'll just have to learn to live with it.

I think that's part of it.  I'd also suggest that both parties have over the past three decades become more defined by ideology than geography, so they're more coherent and actually have a set of beliefs - in some ways that's a good thing.

The worry is your last point.  That's effectively a Parliamentary system, but Congress isn't Parliamentary.  There's too much protection and power for the minority group.  So you've got the ideological rigidity and partisanship of a Parliamentary system, but the institutional requirement for cooperation of your system.  In practice it just means nothing gets done. 

I think you either need to have graceful alternating power which means that Republicans and Democrats pass their agendas and the voters decide, if something's unpopular then next time repeal it.  Or more cooperation and finding of common ground.

For example I think this year Congress has passed one bill.  It asked themselves to stop using inside knowledge in their trading of stocks and shares.

[Queequeg]

Her PR coup?

Sure. All my pro-Obama friends saw that and swooned. /on the social media front, she's had lots of positive chatter from her recent photos. More than any recent Sec State that I can think of.

The role has played to a lot of her strengths, and shown her up as an extremely competent diplomat and politician.  In retrospect, some of my dislike of her back in 08 was unearned-the primary was tough, and heated, but it made both sides stronger.

I actually hope she runs in 2016.

[Sheilbh]

I actually hope she runs in 2016.

That's Joe's year